Originally posted by mbunny
IE compensating for the author makes the authors lazier and encourages them to take shortcuts. As time goes on, standards deteriorate (sp?). HTML has so many ways that it can be written that it had be made uber strict for XHTML.
Encouraging people to take shortcuts is never a good thing. Increasing efficiency and taking shortcuts is totally different by the way. You don't take shortcuts to be more efficient as in the long run the shortcuts catch up to you.
/me do not think this argument is solid
the user cannot be punished if a company seeks to write a program that compensates for beginners who are not writing code according to standard, or lazy programmers, just because they can.
punish the programmers somehow, with a tax on bad code or something that doesn't punish the user
do not punish our benefactors for their desire to make our internet experience a pleasure rather then a chore.
and if you want to prove a point, and drive a car without shock absorbers, I admire your sacrifice.
I'm driving with shock obsorbers...there is no point to be made as far as I can see...further, if I were to conceive a browser, or give awards to a browser, the award would go to the person that was not lazy, and wrote a browser that took into consideration the fact that mistakes will always be made by programmers that design pages
I would certainly not give any credit or award whatsoever to any programmer that took the lazy road, and decided it didn't have to exceed the minimum tolerance.
the writers of the mozilla browser are lazy programmers
they do not want to figure out how to compensate for bad code, so they make excuses for not doing it...and then, they have somehow convinced some people that their browser is better, BECAUSE IT DOES NOT COMPENSATE...this is a marketing trick...try to turn your liability, (lazy programming) into an asset.
here's a perfect example...true story;;
I used to own a modeling agency in n.y..
we were young, and had a very small investment profile.
our office was big, but not refined, like ford or Willamina.
so, when we would try to persuade a prospect to sign with us, instead of ford, we would say;
"look at our doors..they are not made of brass by tiffany!!!this is because we spend that money investing in our models, instead of in our doors"...
most people fell for this trick...
as soon as we could afford nicer doors, we got them
same thing
mbunny...do you really think if the mozilla browser could compensate for bad code, the mozilla people would turn the ability off?????????
OPERA UPDATE;
Since the beta opera has a trial period of no adds or add loading, I tried this browser
first, it is very polished in it's behavior
that's the end of it's good points
the toolbar is humongous, and can only be downsized to the point of aol proportions, taking tons of screen, even with all the toolbars disabled
speed of page-loading is illusionary
lots of acidity on the task bar gives the impression of lots being done, and the impression of speed.
however, going to server timed sites for measuring speed, on my box, ie rendered script faster then opera 9 out of ten times
plus, I couldn't get opera to eliminate the add banners...this may be my lack of experience
I took this thing off my box in about an hour, as how bothersome it is to me.
Phoenix is a much better concept and a much better application for those that want to get away from ie.
with Phoenix, you are giving nothing up at all...not speed, not user ability, not screen area available...everything is as adjustable as ie, and it is an excellent choice
with opera, you are giving up quite a bit in user preferences, and as far as my benchmarks you are also giving up speed.
to me, I was not even able to tolerate this browser.